zlacker

Lemmie guess, in six month we hear Google is killing Pixel.

>>PaulHo+(OP)
From https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Don't be curmudgeonly. Thoughtful criticism is fine, but please don't be rigidly or generically negative.

>>bitpus+z3
In a better world.. goog could be as helpful towards grOS as aapl towards asahi. But "anything that doesn't detract from selling hw is fine" can't make it into goog's once-aspirational "knowledge economy" business calculus. (Legal considerations contribute further inertia)

I think though, "write-only" third-party contributions are a necessary evolutionary step towards a more balanced ecosystem, so lack of an open reference could lead to the needed experimentation, both legal and technical

>>gsf_em+l8
I've not kept up with Asahi, but how is Apple helping Asahi? My surface level understanding was Asahi was reverse engineering everything and Apple is offering 0 help/support.

>>bitpus+Vc
Depends on your definition of "help".

Apple doesn't support Asahi specifically but did build in the capability to boot another OS and intentionally does not block it.

>>seabro+Nf
If adding a capability to boot another OS is seen as a big gesture, Google providing an entire operating system source code should be a bigger deal yes?

One is cracking open a door (Apple) and the other is opening the door wide, and welcoming you into your home.

>>seabro+Nf
But as of the M4 Macs, Apple is preventing the Asahi team from learning how the drivers work with a “bug” in the bootloader: https://social.treehouse.systems/@sven/114278224116678776

>>philod+lm
Eh, not surprising.

>>bitpus+Zi
>welcoming you into your home

Didn't mean to imply that Aapl can't be accused of perfidious behaviour on the sw side, but the erstwhile welcomes mean that Goog's betrayal, when it happens, even a minor one that doesn't kill the biz, hurts a lot more?

>>bitpus+Zi
I agree with you. I was just responding to the Asahi comment in isolation.

To play devil's advocate though, Darwin is technically open source?

>>bitpus+Zi
Google doesn't provide "entire operating system source code", it provides some parts, while other they keep closed. Also they are continuously removing parts that are essential from AOSP (that are either open or closed).

Removing support for Pixel devices makes AOSP even less useful for developers, because belief that VM will be a good replacement for real hardware test environment is a fairy tale next to sleeping beauty.

So no, they don't provide "entire operating system source code", what they provide is a caricature of open source project. So maybe they should call it COSP.